The u175 2008-2009 takes an interesting turn!!
The decisions of the disputed games in the Kent v Essex and Sussex v Kent match are in. I'll deal with the less interesting match first before moving on to the meaty issues that arise as a result of the other.
The Controller upholds Kent's claim of a win against Sussex.
Why is this uninteresting? Well when you're 2-13 down does it really make a difference. I'll say one further thing then move on. You'll note that Kent where unable to field a full XVI defaulting 6 boards. Why, oh why when you're in with a shout of qualifying for the ECF do you not pull out all the stops to field some kind of team? This result ensures Kent are unable to qualify.
The reason why this match bugs me is that earlier in the cycle Middlesex's Open team were lambasted for 2 defaults! (see link for full details
www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/let.htm)Not being one to feel the need to post a comment on the SCCU website, it was felt necessary as the integrity of your author was being questioned. As this thread is specifically for the u175 I'm not going to look at the other sections but if we consider defaults in our section we see the following:
Total defaults
Essex 1
Kent 6Sussex 7
Without sounding too smug (no to be smug) and this is aimed squarely between the eyes of my critic: Surely Kent should keep their own house in order before criticising others otherwise it smacks of hypocrisy. See Defaults thread for further musings
Onto the second dispute. The outstanding game in the Kent v Essex match. The Controller declares game void. Final result match drawn 7.5-7.5.
I won't go into the full details of how the dispute came about or the how the decision was arrived at (see link below for that), but this result is a bit of a blow for Essex. On the assumption their claim was upheld Essex would be champions once again and could relax in their last match against Sussex on the 7th March. Now they will be on tenter hooks as ironically they will need us to do them a favour and get at least a draw if not beat Sussex on the 21st February else their match could turn out to be a title decider!
Why can this claim be made? At present the u175 table looks like this:
1. Essex 5.5/7 (can finish no lower than 2nd)
2. Sussex 3.5/6
3. Middlesex 2.5/6 (Mx ahead of Surrey due to their win) 4. Surrey 2.5/6
5. Kent 2/7
(Top 3 qualify and with Essex claiming one place: 3 into 2 don't go!)
Question: Should Middlesex field a strong team against Sussex?
The question is posed as in other sports, most notably football, managers have no hesitation putting out weak teams.
In Middlesex's case this can be justified as:
1) Middlesex have an Open team have a match on the 14th February (WHY?
?); with the high attrition rate there will be call for the u175 team to back them up.
2) Equally with the Essex v Kent game being declared a draw Middlesex only have to focus their energy on the Surrey match on the 7th March. A Surrey win against Kent also on the 21st February does not alter the permutation. A defeat to Sussex will mean a winner take all (winner takes the 3rd qualifying spot). Surrey should be up for it as I'm sure they do not wish to emulate us that is as current champions fail to have an opportunity to defend the title in the k-o stage.
These are compelling reasons not to field anything resembling a strong team - despite the previous post (Oh no! Now I'm beginning to sound like a hypocrite
).
A Middlesex defeat to Sussex will mean that the the final round of matches have something at stake: Essex v Sussex match is a title decider; Middlesex v Surrey to take final spot.
Now if Middlesex wished to be mischievious they should field a weak team against Sussex and see if they lose the match; this would give Essex something to think about.
What do you think?
[Note: I don't know whether my Essex counterpart is contemplating these permutations. If he is or if he reads this post then I'm sure I can see an appeal against the decision coming up! We'll wait and see]
Full details of dispute / decision:
www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/match2.htm